Compare phones
| Global Score | |
| 75.8 | 81.6 |
| Basic Information | |
| Android 9.0 Pie | -- |
| 2019-10-16 | 2017-10-19 |
| 6.76 x 3.09 x 0.38 inches | 5.74 x 2.74 x 0.31 inches |
| 7.58 ounces | 5.04 ounces |
| Cyber shade | Black, Blue and White |
| Aluminum | Aluminum and Glass |
| Scratch-Resistant Glass | Scratch-Resistant Glass |
| $ 600.00 | $ 129.00 |
| Display / Screen | |
| 6.7 inches | 5 inches |
| 2340 x 1080 pixels | 1920 x 1080 pixels (Full HD) |
| AMOLED | AMOLED |
| 385 pixels per inch | 441 pixels per inch |
| No touch screen | No touch screen |
| 8.1 | 8.3 |
| Performance | |
| Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+ SM8150-AC chipset | Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 chipset |
| Kryo 485, 64-bit, 7 nm (Octa-Core 2960 MHz) processor | Kryo 280, 64-bit, 10 nm (Octa-Core 2350 MHz) processor |
| 12 GB RAM | 4 GB RAM |
| Adreno 640 GPU | Adreno 540 GPU |
| 9.81 | 9.27 |
| Storage | |
| 256 GB internal memory | 128 GB internal memory |
| No SD card slot | No SD card slot |
| 13.3 | 10.1 |
| Camera | |
| 48.00 MP + 16.00 MP | 12.20 MP + 8.00 MP |
| f/1.70 aperture | f/1.80 aperture |
| 26.00mm focal length | 27.00mm focal length |
| 0.5 inches (1/2") sensor | 0.38 inches (1/2.6") sensor |
| 7680 x 4320 (15 fps) video resolution | 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) video resolution |
| 3840 x 2160 (30 fps) (4K) slow motion video | 1280 x 720 (240 fps) (HD) slow motion video |
| 11.88 | 9.79 |
| Networks | |
| Wi-Fi | Wi-Fi |
| Mobile Hotspot | Mobile Hotspot |
| LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA | LTE-A (4G), LTE (4G), HSPA+ (4G), HSDPA and HSUPA |
| Nano SIM, Dual SIM | Nano SIM, Dual SIM |
| 6.7 | 6.7 |
| Battery Life | |
| 5000mAh Li - Polymer Battery | 2700mAh Li - Ion Battery |
| Non-Removable Battery | Non-Removable Battery |
| 6.8 | 4.64 |
| Other Features | |
| Bluetooth 5.0 | Bluetooth 5.0 |
| GPS | GPS |
| -- | NFC |
| Fingerprint ID Scanner | Fingerprint ID Scanner |
| Accelerometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor | Accelerometer, Barometer, Compass, Gyroscope, Light Sensor and Proximity Sensor |
Comparison review
Google Pixel 2 is a little bit better than nubia Red Magic 3S, getting a score of 81.6 against 75.8. Even though Google Pixel 2 is older than nubia Red Magic 3S, it's construction is extremely lighter and thinner. Nubia Red Magic 3S has just a little better performance than Google Pixel 2, and although they both have the same number of cores, the nubia Red Magic 3S also has more RAM.
The Google Pixel 2 features a little bit better looking display than nubia Red Magic 3S, because although it has a lot smaller screen and a little bit worse resolution of 1080 x 1920px, it also counts with a little bit more pixels per inch in the screen. Nubia Red Magic 3S has a much greater memory capacity for games and applications than Google Pixel 2, because it has 128 GB more internal memory.
Nubia Red Magic 3S features a much better camera than Google Pixel 2, because it has a much better video definition, a back camera with a lot higher resolution, a lot larger camera sensor capturing more light and vivid colors and a larger diafragm aperture to capture better low light images and video.
The nubia Red Magic 3S counts with a very superior battery duration than Google Pixel 2, because it has a 5000mAh battery capacity instead of 2700mAh.
Despite of being the best phone of the ones in this comparison, the Google Pixel 2 is also a bargain compared to others, making it very easy to pick between these phones.
Disclaimer: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.